1 JULY

Comrades! To my great regret, I must confine myself to self-defence. (Laughter.) I say — to my great regret — because after familiarizing myself with comrade Terracini's speech and with the amendments introduced by three delegations, I would have very much liked to go on the offensive, for against the views which Terracini and these three delegations have been defending, what is needed, strictly speaking, are offensive actions.

24
V. I. LENIN

of the fact that we not only formally condemned genuine centrists, but expelled them from the party. Those are the facts. I must take these theses under my protection. And when now Terracini appears and says that we must continue the struggle against centrists, and then tells how this struggle is to be waged, I say that if these amendments are meant to express a certain direction, then what is necessary is a merciless struggle against that direction, because otherwise there is no communism and no Communist International. I am surprised that the...

In my life I have met and spoken with few anarchists, yet I have seen enough of them. I have sometimes managed to come to an understanding with them regarding aims, but never on the question of principles. Principles are not aims, not a programme, not tactics, and not theory. Tactics and theory — these are not principles. What distinguishes us from anarchists in respect of principles? The principles of communism consist in the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat and in the application of state coercion during the transition period. Such are the principles of communism, but this is not its aim. And the comrades who introduced such a proposal made a mistake.

Secondly, there it says: "The word 'majority' should be struck out." Read it all:

"The III Congress of the Communist International proceeds to a review of questions of tactics in conditions where in a whole series of countries the objective situation has been sharpened in a revolutionary sense and where a whole series of communist mass parties has been organized, but nowhere, however, have they taken into their hands the actual leadership of the majority of the working class in their genuine revolutionary struggle."

And now they want to strike out the word "majority". If we cannot agree on such simple things, then I do not understand how we can work together and lead the proletariat to victory. Then there is nothing to wonder at that we cannot reach agreement on the question of principles. Show me such a party that has already won the majority of the working class. Terracini did not even think of providing some example. And no such example exists.

So: in place of "principles" put the word "aims", and strike out the word "majority". Much obliged! We shall not agree to this. Even the German party — one of the best — does not have the majority of the working class behind it. That is a fact. We, standing before the most difficult struggle, do not fear to state this truth, but here there are three delegations wishing to begin with falsehood, because if the Congress strikes out the word "majority", then by doing so it will show that it wants falsehood. This is perfectly clear.

Then there comes such an amendment: "On page 4, in column 1, in line 10, the words 'Open Letter,' etc., should be struck out."

26
V. I. LENIN

whoever does not understand that in Europe — where almost all proletarians are organized — we must win the majority of the working class, that man is lost to the communist movement, he will never learn anything if in the course of three years of great revolution he has not learned it yet.

Terracini says that in Russia we were victorious, although the party was very small. He is dissatisfied with what is said in the theses regarding Czechoslovakia. There are 27 amendments here, and if I were to think of criticizing them, I would have to, like some of the speakers, speak for at least three hours... Here it was declared that in Czechoslovakia the communist party numbers from 300 to 400 thousand members, that it is necessary to attract the majority, to create an invincible force and to continue attracting new working masses. Terracini is already ready for an attack. He says: if the party already has 400 thousand workers, why do we need more? Strike it out! (Laughter.) He is afraid of the word "masses" and wants to erase it. Comrade Terracini understood the Russian revolution only a little.

We were in Russia a small party, but with us we had, moreover, the majority of the Soviets of workers' and peasants' deputies of the entire country. (Exclamation: "That's true!") Where is that with you? With us we had almost half of the army, in which at that time there numbered, at least, 10 million people. Do you have the majority of the army? Show me such a country! If comrade Terracini's views are shared by three more delegations, then all is not well in the International! Then we must say: "Stop! Decisive struggle! Otherwise the Communist International is lost." (Movement in the hall.)

On the basis of the experience I possess, I must say, although I occupy a defensive position (laughter), that the aim of my speech and the principle of it is the defence of the resolution and theses proposed by our delegation. Of course, it would be pedantic to say that not a single letter in them can be changed. I have had to read many resolutions, and I am well aware that into every line one could introduce some amendments,

27